Glasgow - Equal Pay Update
As I thought Gary Smith has been badly 'stung' by the post I published yesterday which had some critical words to say about the GMB 's handling of its members equal pay claims in Glasgow.
Perfectly fair, I thought, given the circumstances, but perhaps predictably Gary has lashed out instead of accepting the GMB's responsibility for this terrible mess of its own making.
Here is the GMB's response to what I had to say which is probably the longest email letter I've ever read - a curious cross between a ramble and a rant.
Now I wrote to Gary well over a week ago to suggest that we work together in the interests of all the claimants, but I never received an acknowledgment to my letter never mind a positive response.
Hence my decision to call a 'spade a spade' on the blog site the other day.
So the ball is still in the GMB's court, for example the union could help by explaining exactly how the former bonus earning jobs (Gravediggers, Gardeners etc) received more favourable treatment under the City Council's Employee Development Commitment (EDC) scheme, even though the GMB is not part of the challenge to the Council's JES and WPBR.
At the moment Gary seems unable to 'see the wood for the trees', but maybe that will change and if so, he knows how to get in touch.
In the meantime, here are some facts on the track record of A4ES which is based on getting results, unlike the GMB which has been taking its members' union fees for years while letting them down in the fight for equal pay.
- A4ES is proud of its track record which bears bears repeating
- Without A4ES there would not have been any equal pay settlements in 2005 because up until then the employers and unions kept the workforce in the dark about the big pay differences between male and female jobs
- A4ES clients in Glasgow received much better 1st Wave settlements because A4ES did not agree to a 'cap' of just £9,000 - in a deal with the unions which also excluded lots of groups and compensation over issues such as overtime working
- Without A4ES there would not have been in any challenge to the Pay Protection arrangements in Glasgow since A4ES started the challenge immediately whereas the GMB didn't even begin a challenge until after pay protection finished
- A4ES has led the challenge to Glasgow's WPBR from the outset and now all the GMB are doing is trying to 'jump on the bandwagon' after the victory at the Court Session
- A4ES is not in the least embarrassed by the fact that we charge for services - A4ES is the lowest charging firm in the UK and believes we are worth every penny because of our track record of success.
- GMB members have a simple choice - do you believe an organisation that's been keeping you in the dark and misleading you for 10 years, or A4ES that has been telling people the truth for the past 12 years?
- By the way this is the first time that Gary Smith has acknowledged publicly that the GMB has messed up (again) in Glasgow although there is still no sign of the promised 'investigation' into what went wrong previously in North Lanarkshire - more than two years ago
Dear Gary
Glasgow and Equal Pay
Yours sincerely
GMB Scotland Secretary
I have had lots to say on my blog site recently about the ongoing fight for equal pay in Glasgow City Council.
My comments regarding the GMB have been quite critical, as you know, and although I believe my criticisms are entirely justified I am also mindful of the fact that you were not actually in Glasgow at the time and, therefore, had no direct responsibility for the behaviour of the local trade unions back in 2005, 2006 and 2007.
Having read your recent comments on the current situation in Glasgow I think it would be to everyone's advantage, if Action 4 Equality Scotland and the local unions (GMB, Unison and Unite) were to work together with the aim of achieving the best possible outcome for the thousands of equal pay claimants we represent.
To my mind the local unions are well placed to help get to the bottom of the City Council's pay protection arrangements which, as you know, treated women workers very differently to their male colleagues, and went way beyond the nationally agreed 3-year protection period as a consequence of the City Council's Employee Development Commitment (EDC).
As the EDC scheme benefited traditional male, former bonus earning jobs I am sure the local unions in Glasgow are in a position to explain exactly what happened in respect of the City Council's Gravediggers, Gardeners and Refuse Workers etc - in other words we don't need to rely on what senior council managers or advisors have to say.
I am confident that this information will come out into the open one way or another, eventually, but the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned and the information will obviously be a great help to all the female claimants.
My suggestion is that we should pool our efforts and increase the pressure on the City Council in the weeks ahead by highlighting how the former bonus earning jobs were given special treatment under the EDC and the council's pay protection arrangements.
If you would like to discuss my proposal in more detail I would be happy to come along to the GMB office at Fountain House or anywhere else you might like to meet. I would attend any meeting on my own though I have no problem with you being accompanied by one of more of your GMB colleagues.
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
Dear GMB Member
That’s why they are currently touting for more GMB members to transfer their claims to A4E. In the blog post of Tuesday 22 August they make two spurious claims which have circulated social media:
• Any GMB members transferring claims to A4ES will have their claims re-registered and will have a new claim started as well, but they may have to consider separate action against the GMB (and/or its lawyers) if they suffer a financial loss because of the GMB's handling of their original claim. The suggestion that A4E can somehow get something for our members which we cannot is simply wrong. We are now taking action to ensure that our members can pursue claims for the maximum amount possible in light of the recent decision in relation to the claims in Glasgow.
• Any GMB members transferring claims to A4ES will have their claims re-registered and will have a new claim started as well, but they may have to consider separate action against the GMB (and/or its lawyers) if they suffer a financial loss because of the GMB's handling of their original claim. The suggestion that A4E can somehow get something for our members which we cannot is simply wrong. We are now taking action to ensure that our members can pursue claims for the maximum amount possible in light of the recent decision in relation to the claims in Glasgow.
I recently received a personal communication from them requesting discussions with me on the future of equal pay claims in Glasgow City Council. The letter from Mark Irvine on behalf of A4E said: “I think it would be to everyone's advantage, if Action 4 Equality Scotland and the local unions (GMB, Unison and Unite) were to work together with the aim of achieving the best possible outcome for the thousands of equal pay claimants we represent.”
I assume here that they are referring to the actions of trade unions in GCC taken on the advice of their legal affiliates at that particular period of time.
Yours sincerely
GMB Scotland Secretary